FORGET KHAN AND HITLER; INDUSTRY'S ROLE MODEL IS THE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE

FORGET KHAN AND HITLER; INDUSTRY'S ROLE MODEL IS THE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE


By Donie Vanitzian, BA, JD, Arbitrator
(c)2006


THE DICE OF THE LEGISLATURE ARE ALWAYS LOADED

I am so sick of hearing the shallow chatter of homeowners perfecting their whining technique, "But what can I do? I'm only ONE person. No one's going to listen to ME. I don't have the time."

There is little meaningful input from homeowners to our legislature. Of that "input" it certainly does not amount to a significant concerted effort that will make a difference in the laws governing us. Most of the input from owners toward what's happening to them by the legislature amounts to nothing more than banal banter. Perhaps they do not fully understand the laws they are forced to live with and by, but that really is no excuse.

After all, they chose to buy that property that they own. Excuses aside for their poor choices, no one put a gun to their head and said "you will enter escrow." Interestingly enough, the same owners that sit around and discuss patio fences and amenities for five hours, can't be bothered to pick up a pen and paper and blast the legislators who are responsible for bastardizing laws governing how we are forced to live. Or, worse yet, they don't vote in their association's elections and they haven't bothered to read their governing documents, never mind they don't have a clue what a proxy or a ballot is. Or, even if they do, everything's rigged so why bother.

Then there are the homeowner letters that Legislators bury or lose. We'll never know how many of us did try to have our voices heard. All are meant to discourage our attempt to obtain fairness in the laws.

The saying in criminal law is, "if nobody talks, everybody walks." That's what's happening here. The owners aren't complaining loud enough, or they are complaining about the wrong things, or they are not convincing enough for anyone to take proper notice, so the criminals ‑ you know who they are ‑ are out there, "walking."

Nowhere is this more prevalent than in associations where owners moan and groan, "I don't know where the money is going!" Me: "did you make a demand to look at the books and records?" Them: "well yes, but I didn't get an answer." Me: "Did you make another demand?" Them: "Well, kinda, I saw some books, the ones they let me see." Me: "And you settled for that did you?" Them: "What else was I supposed to do?" Then there are those who say , "none of our association's numbers add up, I know my board is lying to me!" Predicable question follows: "And then what did you do, nothing?"

The problem with these realities is that they repeat themselves a billion times across America. The money too, adds up to billions in lost homeowner funds. Well, "lost" isn't quite the right word, "theft, robbery, embezzlement, deceit, fraud" are probably more realistic terms. But is it really theft when the board of directors is RESPONSIBLE for watching the fox in the henhouse? If you hire criminals do you not get what you paid for?

Here's what all that boils down to for owners: You don't care if you are lied to.


INDUSTRY INSURGENTS

The industry are not per se insurgents, they are an organized gang. That's right, they are legal gangsters. How did the association industry come to own our legislature? The industry is not armed in the literal sense, but they are no less "armed." They are armed with money. Industry wields an unearned air of authority through campaign contributions. While money can't buy you love, it can buy you a Senator or Assemblymember or even an impressionable Zogby poll or two, which in turn influences let alone buys, the laws you need passed. They now spin and beat that poll to death. Where did that Zogby poll end up? It ended up being quoted in California's legislature in support of that bogus Ombudsman's bill. Industry's opposition or armed resistance so to speak, to an established government that was supposed to protect us as homeowners has far more influence than a simple owner of a piece of property.

Let's go back in time for just a moment. Carefully ponder these three historical events: Genghis Khan conquered provinces inch‑by‑inch eliminating competition by destroying those humans who competed with him. "Him" is not plural. It is singular. Khan was a Mongol conqueror who then united the Mongol Tribes. Genghis Khan became "plural" when he gathered support. The result of his efforts was a gain in HIS 'land.' He conquered Turkistan, Transoxania, Afghanistan, and raided Persia and eastern Europe and did it by killing people and taking what they had. The key here was Khan's ANNEXATION of northern China, central Asia, Iran, and southern Russia. With the gain in land his influence and prominence grew exponentially and ruled the greatest land empires of history.

Nomads, otherwise known as "turks" from Turkistan wanted what others had as well. They liked what other successful and thriving nations had accumulated, but didn't want to work that hard toward accomplishment. So they just "took" what they wanted. After all, Genghis Khan did it, why not the turks. The turks planned an extermination. They accomplished their means by annihilating through genocide, the already successful Armenian people (at that time a thriving large country). [FN1] Not only was the Armenian culture stolen from them the devastation of the Armenians occurred in their native homeland. U.S. Ambassador Morganthau stated, "The most terrible scenes took place at the rivers especially at the Euphrates, in a loop of the river near Erzinghan . . . the thousands of dead bodies created such a barrage that the Euphrates changed its course for about a hundred yards." Instantly, the country of Turkey was put on the map and quick to rewrite history due to their thievery yielding a new found "heritage" from others who took centuries to build it. At the time, Turkey had no real ascertainable culture of their own. Theirs was a culture that was obtained by pillaging the riches of others and Turkey's prominence grew exponentially. [FN3]

Soon the whitewash by way of spin machines sprung into action, "The goal of the Turkish government and its collaborators is to undermine the authenticity of the Genocide [and] expunge it from the textbooks." [FN1] Turkish officials: "You don't seem to understand what we want. We want an Armenia without Armenians." [FN6]

The lack of "action following the Armenian genocide was an important precedent for the subsequent Jewish Holocaust of World War II." [FN2] Hitler wanted a Germany without any Jews, and toward the end he wanted a world free of Jews. [FN3] In both the Armenian and the Jewish cases, when given the opportunity individuals were forced to conform (change religions or beliefs) or be killed. Hitler annihilated an entire race person‑by‑person then graduated country‑by‑country to fulfill his takeover of the world.

Hitler praised Genghis Khan. "On August 22, 1939, Adolf Hitler gave a secret speech to his top military advisers, outlining his plans for German settlement of Poland. The speech so shocked his audience that a copy was smuggled out to the British embassy. What follows is the transcript, now in the files of the Foreign Office in London." [FN4] Hitler said: "Our strength lies in our quickness and in our brutality; Genghis Khan has sent millions of women and children into death knowingly and with a light heart. History sees in him only the great founder of States. [referring to the Turks he said] Who still talks nowadays of the extermination of the Armenians?" [FN4,5]


THEY ARE TAKING YOUR PROPERTY

Taking away our real and personal property today is much easier than changing the course of the Euphrates. But the ease and progression of taking our assets is no less painful or calculated than centuries past. Oh it's nothing as sinister as contemplating the return of the Ottoman Empire, but given the totality of the circumstances the industry's quickness and brutality is no less devastating.

Like the turks who wanted what others had but didn't want to work that hard to get it, industries today have devised ways to merely "take" what they want. The industry is not interested in legitimacy, they don't need to be interested in something as mundane as THAT. They have no interest in articulating a unified ideology because they already own the laws and lawmakers that govern titleholders. Their indignation lies in the fact that they are burdened in dealing with homeowners at all. They are repulsed by the fact they simply cannot stick an intravenous device directly into our bank accounts. Not to worry, they are nearly "indirectly" there. The recapture of our equity is part of that intravenous drip. Our equity is depleted in many different ways; these silent killers deplete your personal assets while you sleep.

Drip: The creation of another government bureaucracy named Ombudsman.

Drip: Pay to fund the Ombudsman office and pay for material distributed by them.

Drip: Pay the California Secretary of State a per‑association registration fee of $50.00.

Drip: Pay escrow transfer fees that keep getting porked up.

Drip: Pay 20%+ rise in assessments without a vote and going up.

Drip: Pay special assessments.

Drip: Pay emergency assessments.

Drip: Pay association judgments.

Drip: Pay association attorneys.

Drip: Pay for your own attorneys.

Drip: Pay for association insurance policies.

Drip: Pay for management company to file a bogus notice of assessments on your title courtesy of your stupid board.

Drip: Paying mystery fees.

Drip: Pay for association parties and functions and attendance at seminars.

Drip: Pay for management company unaccountability and infiltration of your association.

Drip: Pay for board of directors unaccountability through insurance indemnification.

Drip: Pay for the association's attorney retainer agreements and fees, fees, fees.

Drip: Pay the association to bring lawsuits and restraining orders against owners like you.

Drip: Pay fines, penalties, foreclosure, loss of Homestead exemption


Drip: Pay for maintenance.

Drip: Pay for incompetence.


And the drip goes on . . .

Why is history so important to us in what seems such a minor problem in comparison to the discussions above? Because piecemeal the outcome of industry's influence will have no less an impact than the outcomes above. How will you start over? What will your new quality‑of‑life be like? What could be worse than losing your property or personal belongings that took you a lifetime to acquire? Those in the events above lost their properties and their personal belongings to thieves. Obviously, as homeowners we are unlikely to be murdered in the literal sense, BUT as more laws are activated stripping us of our rights, we are unable to protect our homes, families, and personal assets. The results are that we end up being the personal banking system for a parasitic industry. We lose our individual accumulated wealth and our lives are paralyzed. Ruined. Destroyed.

What has happened to private individuals through time will also happen to us. Death may not come in the literal sense, but what's left over may be worse. Not unlike those who are dependent on life support controlled by strangers ‑‑ once bankrupted or gradually stripped of our personal assets to the extent it will be impossible for us to experience life as we once knew it or as we want to know it ‑‑ we are in no better position than those plundered and left behind by the nomads. Perhaps you'll find that pen and paper now and write that letter you've been meaning to write.

FOOTNOTES:
[FN1] During the Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Future Foreign Policy Research and Development of the Committee on International Relations House of Representatives, 94th Cong., 2d Sess (May 11, Aug. 30, 1972) Washington DC 1976, Testimony states: AUnprecedented in human history, the Turks resorted to a device that involved the release from all prisons of the Ottoman Empire and the most blood‑thirsty criminals called in Turkish kanli katil, estimated to be between 15,000 and 20,000. They were put in military uniform, retrained and deployed strategically so as to execute the task of mass slaughter under most primitive conditions.@

[FN2] V. Dadrian, Genocide as a Problem of National and International Law; The World War I Armenian Case and its Contemporary Legal Ramifications, 14 Yale J. Int'l L. 221 (1989).

[FN3] Vanitzian & Kopkin, 'In the Name of the People' ‑‑ A Faustian Paradox: The Betrayal By Physicians, Lawyers, Judges, Academics and Ethicists of the Sovereign People's Ultimate Civil Liberty (1997).

[FN4] Hitler's Plan's for Genocide: A Speech From 1939, 313 Brit. Med. J. 1416 (1996).

[FN5] Louis Lochner, Office of U.S. Chief of Counsel for Prosecution of Axis Criminals (Berlin correspondent for Associated Press), 7 Nazi Conspiracy & Aggression 752‑754 (Washington, D.C. 1946).

[FN6] V. Dadrian, The Naim‑Andonian Documents, 19 Int'l J. Middle East Studies 332 (1998).